I think this is also a rather extreme position to take. This would eliminate
the budget racer, as well as the super rich. There are some racers who would
have to personally field 2 or 3 Ferrari 250 Testarossas to qualify by this
measure. There are also racers who would be out for quite a while if they
bent a Formula Vee. I say a vintage race car should ONLY be owned by somebody
who CAN afford to fix it. If not, then the car could lay up in storage a long
time until either the owner mustered the funds, or sadly sold it to someone
who could afford the repairs. This would mean we would be deprived of the
pleasure of seeing it put through its paces in the only venue that makes sense
for some cars.
I say it's all about attitude. If your attitude is, "It's just a toy. It can
be replaced. Shit happens," then I would rather not race with you. If it makes
you physically ill or at least very disturbed to see ANY car bent out of shape,
then I would be glad to race with you. There are people who drive very common
cars as though it meant the world to them to keep them in good shape. There are
people who drive irreplaceable cars as though they were tissue paper to be
discarded when used. (You listening Stirling?) There are also fabulously
wealthy people who drive very expensive cars with the utmost respect for the
fellow next to them in a car worth several orders of magnitude less. It's all
about attitude.
David Laver wrote:
>
> > Watching the driver of a 1964 aluminum bodied
> > Cobra worth several hundred Gs working the corners is a worthwhile sight
>
> Its an interesting line of thought. Maybe Vintage Racing should be means
> tested. Everyone out there needs to be committing a stupid proportion of
>their
> net wealth to ensure both the spectacle and ensure proper restraint.
>
> David
|